Pang-oden v.

Leonen
G.R. No. 138939

FACTS:
Basically, the case involves a boundary dispute between petitioners
and respondents. Both claim ownership of a strip of land consisting of
1,336.5 square meters.
Petitioners and respondents are the owners of 2 adjoining parcels of
land located at Sudipen, La Union. Petitioner’s land is at the eastern
portion while that of the respondents is at the western side. The two
properties have a common boundary: a creek which ran from south to
north, such that petitioner’s property was bounded by said creek on the
west, while that of respondent’s was bounded by the same creek on the
east. Due to constant heavy rains and flood, water from the creek
overflowed and destroyed the irrigation canal located at the north of the
property in dispute. In order to minimize the damage to the irrigation
canal, the National Irrigation Administration diverted the course of the
creek so rain water will not go directly to the irrigation canal. As a result,
the course of the creek which originally ran from south to north and which
used to separate the respective properties of the parties was instead
diverted to run from south to northwest, passing through the middle
portion of the respondents property and resulting to the formation of a
new creek. Consequently, the NIA asked the permission of Manuel
Leonen, one of the respondents, to allow it to use the new creek as an
irrigation canal. Manuel Leonen consented. The portion segregated by
the new creek, consisting of 1,336.5 square meters, is the strip of land
subject of this controversy.
According to the respondents, for more than 50 years, they have
been in quiet, peaceful, adverse and uninterrupted possession of the
disputed property. Sometime in 1976, however, Manuel Leonen saw the
carabao of petitioner Alejandro Pang-oden devouring the Leonens’ sugar
cane crops planted on the property in question. It was then that Manuel
Leonen discovered that petitioners had encroached on the 1,336.5-
square meter portion of their property and had in fact occupied the
same. Respondents brought the matter before the local barangay
authorities but Alejandro Pang-oden refused to surrender possession of
said portion claiming that he is the lawful owner thereof.
After repeated demands to vacate the subject strip of land
remained unheeded, the respondents filed a complaint for Recovery of
Possession Based on Ownership against the spouses Alejandro and
Saturnina Pang-oden before the RTC of Balaoan, La Union. The RTC ruled
in favor of the respondents and ordered the spouses Pang-oden to
vacate the subject land.
ISSUE:
Who, as between the petitioners and the respondents, own the strip
of land subject of the suit

HELD:
The respondents are the lawful owners of the subject land. The
evidence on record clearly establish that there used to be an old creek
originally running from south to north and separating the property of the
petitioners from that of the respondents. Then, due to expediency and
necessity of protecting the irrigation canal in the area, the course of that
creek was subsequently diverted to run from south to northwest, cutting
through the property of the respondents. Hence, the portion segregated
(the subject property) from respondents land as a result of such diversion
continues to be their property and they shall retain ownership of the
same.
Article 434 of the Civil Code which ordains that in an action to
recover, the property must be identified, and the plaintiff must rely on the
strength of his title and not on the weakness of the defendant’s claim.
Hence, in order that an action for the recovery of property may prosper, it
is indispensable that the party who prosecutes it must fully prove, not only
his ownership of the thing claimed, but also the identity of the same.
The cadastral survey of the property clearly identifies and
delineates the extent of the subject land. As the petitioners failed to
substantiate their claim that the present creek is still the same creek which
bounds their property on the west, the respondents have the right to
recover possession of the disputed strip of land.